Timothy Kim Annotation #9 12/11/2011 STS Film Series: The Yes Men Fix the World Word Count: 1307
The Yes Men Fix the World was directed by Andy Bichlbaum, Mike Bonanno, and Kurt Engfehr, and released in 2009.
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The film suggests that some hoax is necessary to increase public awareness in some issues that large corporations are not taking the responsibilities for. By exposing the environmental sustainability problems resulted by corporations greed, the film encourages the audience to demand their rights from the corporations and the government.
How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is provided, for example? Does the film have emotional appeal?
The film follows the main pranks planned and executed by Andy Bichlbaum and Mike Bonanno. By introducing the process and reasons for choosing their targets, the film shows their careful planning for the pranks. After showing the video record of their pranks, the film also shows the clips from the media so the audience can understand the aftermath. This humorous film may offer a wide range of emotional appeal since the audience may view the film as a joke or serious environmental documentary.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
Andy and Mike, serious anti-globalization activists, pose as executives from Exxon, Dow Chemical, Halliburton and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (H.U.D.). They lie their way into business conferences and parody their corporate or government targets in the most controversial ways possible in order to wake up their audiences to the danger of letting greed run our world. For example, Andy and Mike, the Yes Men, demonstrated a new biofuel made from climate-change victims. By handing out candles, which made with human hair, during the conference, the unsuspecting people at the conference learn that the lit candles they hold are made out of dead people.
The Yes Men challenge the public why we have given the market more power than any other institution to determine our direction as a society. Sometime they get busted front of 1000 New Orleans contractors alongside Mayor Ray Nagin, but they managed to invite some contractors to support low-income people who were victimized by Hurricane Katrina and left out from the H.U.D.’s community rebuilding projects and supports. The Yes Men challenge the government by claiming that the “government has been drinking Friedmen’s cool aid of free market.” They further argue that the “government get rid of regulation that support to protect people.” Because of conflicts in shareholders, the corporations have been prioritizing their shareholders’ interests over victims of their greed.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why? Andy posing as a Dow Chemical spokesperson and getting on the biggest TV news program in the world was my favorite part of the film. His announcement that Dow will finally clean up the site of the largest industrial accident in history, the Bhopal catastrophe, was most compelling due to its impact. More than 300 million worldwide viewers of BBC celebrated and Dow's stock value lost two billion dollars. Although people want Dow to do the right thing, Dow decided that it can't. More specifically, the Yes Men gave faux corporate interviews pretending to be DOW executives in which they supposedly announce setting up a $12 billion fund for the victims of the 1984 Bhopal disaster that killed 1,773 people. The fact that the Yes Men visited Bhopal, India to confirm the support from the victims persuaded me. When the local leaders and victims appreciate the Yes Men for their hoax to bring back the worldwide attentions to the Bhopal catastrophe, I understood the importance of increasing awareness in environmental problems.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
Andy and Mike posing as executives from Halliburton were not compelling. Unlike other hoax, the event wasn’t effective. It is not because they didn’t get caught. Comparing to the amount of environmental problems that Halliburton creates, the Yes Men fail to address their wrong doings. From the film, Split Estate, there are many families suffering from the Halliburton’s natural gas operations in America. The Yes Men fail to bring up the big concern to the public.
What audiences does the film best address? Why?
The film effectively addresses to well-educated audience with a sense of humor. The film does an excellent job in making the point and creating some noise. The film, however, doesn’t provide creditable scientific data or clear guidelines how to fix the problems they revealed. The audiences must be well-educated to actually take something out of the film other than laughter. They must know what to do after seeing this film.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
Although the film was an excellent environmental education tool, it could enhance its educational value by sharing their attempts to talk with Exxon or H.U.D. Instead of pulling the pranks, I suggest to negotiate with the possible target before the prank. The Yes Men can use their reputation to talk with the corporations or the government agencies. Instead of hurting them through media after the prank, I believe the Yes Men can convince some of the corporations or the government agencies to correct their mistakes and support the Yes Men before the prank.
What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective actions, describe actions that you can imagine being effective. At the end of the film, the Yes men admit that they made a splash, but didn’t fix the world. They ask for help since they believe that the world needs more than two guys with cheap suits and fake website. They argue that the world needs million people to do what they do. They encourage the audiences by stating that “if people at the top can make bad news happen, why can’t bottom of people make good news happen,” after they distributed the fake newspapers. I don’t think the film suggest corrective actions. The film should propose more concrete solutions to the problem. The film must provide more effective solutions other than increasing public awareness through hoaxes.
What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?
I watched the bonus feature on the DVD, “A Semi-Secret Video,” about the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This portion of the video has caused the Yes Men to be sued by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and they threaten to destroy all the copy of the clip. The clip was made in September 2009 when the Yes Men worked with the climate change activists. They planned to challenge the group that has been pulling off the world’s biggest hoaxes, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In reality, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the largest corporation that spends nearly half a million dollars every day in lobbying in order to convince U.S. government to not protect the people and environment by killing environmental regulation and undermining the worker’s rights. Since the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spends so much money on their hoaxes, many people believe them. The Yes Men released a fake press release as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that reverses their points on the climate change. During the fake press conference, the representative from the U.S. Chamber of the Commerce disrupted the press meeting. The hoax was successful creating a lot of noise in media. The Yes Men in the clip continue to reveal the U.S Chamber of Commerce by proving that it used the event as an opportunity to accept donation and fundraise. Most importantly, two weeks after the incident, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce actually changed their policy on climate change and began to work with the sponsor of the bill.1
STS Film Series: The Yes Men Fix the World
Word Count: 1307
The Yes Men Fix the World was directed by Andy Bichlbaum, Mike Bonanno, and Kurt Engfehr, and released in 2009.
What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The film suggests that some hoax is necessary to increase public awareness in some issues that large corporations are not taking the responsibilities for. By exposing the environmental sustainability problems resulted by corporations greed, the film encourages the audience to demand their rights from the corporations and the government.
How is the argument or narrative made and sustained? How much scientific information is provided, for example? Does the film have emotional appeal?
The film follows the main pranks planned and executed by Andy Bichlbaum and Mike Bonanno. By introducing the process and reasons for choosing their targets, the film shows their careful planning for the pranks. After showing the video record of their pranks, the film also shows the clips from the media so the audience can understand the aftermath. This humorous film may offer a wide range of emotional appeal since the audience may view the film as a joke or serious environmental documentary.
What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
Andy and Mike, serious anti-globalization activists, pose as executives from Exxon, Dow Chemical, Halliburton and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (H.U.D.). They lie their way into business conferences and parody their corporate or government targets in the most controversial ways possible in order to wake up their audiences to the danger of letting greed run our world. For example, Andy and Mike, the Yes Men, demonstrated a new biofuel made from climate-change victims. By handing out candles, which made with human hair, during the conference, the unsuspecting people at the conference learn that the lit candles they hold are made out of dead people.
The Yes Men challenge the public why we have given the market more power than any other institution to determine our direction as a society. Sometime they get busted front of 1000 New Orleans contractors alongside Mayor Ray Nagin, but they managed to invite some contractors to support low-income people who were victimized by Hurricane Katrina and left out from the H.U.D.’s community rebuilding projects and supports. The Yes Men challenge the government by claiming that the “government has been drinking Friedmen’s cool aid of free market.” They further argue that the “government get rid of regulation that support to protect people.” Because of conflicts in shareholders, the corporations have been prioritizing their shareholders’ interests over victims of their greed.
What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
Andy posing as a Dow Chemical spokesperson and getting on the biggest TV news program in the world was my favorite part of the film. His announcement that Dow will finally clean up the site of the largest industrial accident in history, the Bhopal catastrophe, was most compelling due to its impact. More than 300 million worldwide viewers of BBC celebrated and Dow's stock value lost two billion dollars. Although people want Dow to do the right thing, Dow decided that it can't. More specifically, the Yes Men gave faux corporate interviews pretending to be DOW executives in which they supposedly announce setting up a $12 billion fund for the victims of the 1984 Bhopal disaster that killed 1,773 people. The fact that the Yes Men visited Bhopal, India to confirm the support from the victims persuaded me. When the local leaders and victims appreciate the Yes Men for their hoax to bring back the worldwide attentions to the Bhopal catastrophe, I understood the importance of increasing awareness in environmental problems.
What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
Andy and Mike posing as executives from Halliburton were not compelling. Unlike other hoax, the event wasn’t effective. It is not because they didn’t get caught. Comparing to the amount of environmental problems that Halliburton creates, the Yes Men fail to address their wrong doings. From the film, Split Estate, there are many families suffering from the Halliburton’s natural gas operations in America. The Yes Men fail to bring up the big concern to the public.
What audiences does the film best address? Why?
The film effectively addresses to well-educated audience with a sense of humor. The film does an excellent job in making the point and creating some noise. The film, however, doesn’t provide creditable scientific data or clear guidelines how to fix the problems they revealed. The audiences must be well-educated to actually take something out of the film other than laughter. They must know what to do after seeing this film.
What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
Although the film was an excellent environmental education tool, it could enhance its educational value by sharing their attempts to talk with Exxon or H.U.D. Instead of pulling the pranks, I suggest to negotiate with the possible target before the prank. The Yes Men can use their reputation to talk with the corporations or the government agencies. Instead of hurting them through media after the prank, I believe the Yes Men can convince some of the corporations or the government agencies to correct their mistakes and support the Yes Men before the prank.
What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective actions, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
At the end of the film, the Yes men admit that they made a splash, but didn’t fix the world. They ask for help since they believe that the world needs more than two guys with cheap suits and fake website. They argue that the world needs million people to do what they do. They encourage the audiences by stating that “if people at the top can make bad news happen, why can’t bottom of people make good news happen,” after they distributed the fake newspapers. I don’t think the film suggest corrective actions. The film should propose more concrete solutions to the problem. The film must provide more effective solutions other than increasing public awareness through hoaxes.
What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?
I watched the bonus feature on the DVD, “A Semi-Secret Video,” about the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. This portion of the video has caused the Yes Men to be sued by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and they threaten to destroy all the copy of the clip. The clip was made in September 2009 when the Yes Men worked with the climate change activists. They planned to challenge the group that has been pulling off the world’s biggest hoaxes, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In reality, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the largest corporation that spends nearly half a million dollars every day in lobbying in order to convince U.S. government to not protect the people and environment by killing environmental regulation and undermining the worker’s rights. Since the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spends so much money on their hoaxes, many people believe them. The Yes Men released a fake press release as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that reverses their points on the climate change. During the fake press conference, the representative from the U.S. Chamber of the Commerce disrupted the press meeting. The hoax was successful creating a lot of noise in media. The Yes Men in the clip continue to reveal the U.S Chamber of Commerce by proving that it used the event as an opportunity to accept donation and fundraise. Most importantly, two weeks after the incident, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce actually changed their policy on climate change and began to work with the sponsor of the bill.1
Reference1. The Yes Men Fix The World.” Films for Action. Posted on March 2011. < http://www.filmsforaction.org/Watch/The_Yes_Men_Fix_The_World_2009/>